LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — Fundamental Rights — Jurisdiction for Enforcement of Fundamental Rights Lies in Any High Court in the State Where Breach Occurred
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Both the Federal High Court and the High Court of a State have concurrent jurisdiction. An application may therefore be made either to the Federal High Court in the State or the High Court of the State in which the breach occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Katsina-Alu, JSC, in Grace Jack v. University of Agriculture Makurdi (2004) NLC-2622000(SC) at pp. 6–7; Paras E–A.
"Both the Federal High Court and the High Court of a State have concurrent jurisdiction. An application may therefore be made either to the Judicial Division of the Federal High Court in the State or the High Court of the State in which the breach occurred, is occurring or about to occur."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Federal and State High Courts have concurrent jurisdiction over fundamental rights enforcement. The applicant may choose either court in the State where the breach occurred. The applicant cannot be dismissed for choosing the wrong High Court. The principle applies to all fundamental rights applications. The choice of forum belongs to the applicant. The rule ensures access to justice for fundamental rights claims.